"Let no freedom be allowed to novelty, because it is not fitting that any addition should be made to antiquity. Let not the clear faith and belief of our forefathers be fouled by any muddy admixture."
-- Pope Sixtus III

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

"We have received a DMCA complaint for one or more of your blogs. Emails with the details were sent to you and all affected posts have been reset to "Draft" status (you may find them by selecting "Drafts" on the "Edit posts" page for each of the affected blogs). You may re-publish the posts with the offending content and/or link(s) removed. If you believe you have the rights to post this content, you can file a counter-claim with us. For more on our DMCA policy, please click here. Thank you for your prompt attention."Fuck 'em.Sorry, kiddies, but there will be no more fabulous babes here in my little corner of the digital cesspool (Except for Mikie Inase . They'll have to pry her from my cold, dead hands.) because the Image Nazis have come a-calling. Every photo here was and is available all over the interweb. All you have to do is type the babe's name into Toolgle and you'll have more trim in your lap than Orange Clump at a Klan rally. But for some reason, I have been targeted for harassment that I don't need. And I never tried to make a dime off of any of them.All I can say is keep your heads down, kiddies, because the serious shooting will begin sooner rather than later and I hope you are all ready for it.The posts will remain where they are, but I am going to light a cyber bonfire with the images.Pity.

Monday, October 10, 2016

John Martignoni knows what he's talking about, kiddies. If you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter and put your email address in the box at the top of the page.

Hey folks, A lot of people send me apologetics questions via email or through Facebook. Unfortunately, because of the number of questions I receive, I am unable to answer all but a small number of them. We're approaching 35,000 subscribers to this newsletter, from all 50 states and some 75 or so countries. If even a small percentage of those subscribers send me questions during any given month, we're talking hundreds of questions. Some of those questions might take a minute or two to write, but an hour or two (or more) to answer. I could literally spend all day every day answering email and FB questions, but if I did that I wouldn't be able to pay the bills. I would love to be able to answer all of those questions, but it simply is not possible. So, if you sent me a question and have not received an answer, my apologies. But, that's why I started this newsletter in the first place, to try and answer the more common questions that I receive - questions that Catholics receive about topics related to their faith.

Introduction

Having said that, I have been getting a lot of emails in the last few weeks - and messages on Facebook - about the elections. So, with the elections looming, I thought I would re-visit the Catholic Voting Principles that I published in one of these newsletters right about 4 years ago.

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Voting Principles for Catholics 1) “There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called ‘intrinsically evil' actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #22).Principle:You cannot support something that is intrinsically evil. 2) “A vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy,” (Catholic Times, September 23, 2012, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Diocese of Springfield). "It is important to be clear that the political choices faced by citizens not only have an impact on general peace and prosperity but also may affect the individual's salvation,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #38).Principle:By voting for someone who supports and advocates an intrinsic evil, you are participating in that intrinsic evil, and could possibly be committing a mortal sin that jeopardizes your eternal salvation. 3) “Some issues involve ‘intrinsic evils’; that is, they can never under any circumstance or condition be morally justified. Preeminent among these intrinsic evils are legalized abortion, the promotion of same sex unions and ‘marriages’, repression of religious liberty, as well as public policies permitting euthanasia, racial discrimination or destructive human embryonic stem cell research,” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ).Principle:Abortion, same-sex “marriage,” and the repression of religious liberty - which are three of the pre-eminent issues in this current election cycle - are indeed all intrinsically evil. Therefore, by voting for someone who advocates and supports abortion, same-sex “marriage,” and/or the repression of religious liberty, you are participating in an intrinsic evil and could be jeopardizing your salvation. 4) "The fact that only the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances does not mean, that in the moral life, prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by the positive commandment," (Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II, #52). “The right to life implies and is linked to other human rights—to the basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive. All the life issues are connected, for erosion of respect for the life of any individual or group in society necessarily diminishes respect for all life. The moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors—basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work—is universally binding on our consciences and may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #25).Principle:Both opposing evil and doing good - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, etc. - are essential obligations. Issues that pertain to basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work are all linked to the right to life. 5) "Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good...It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights ofindividuals are founded and from which they develop..." (The Gospel of Life, Pope John Paul II, #72; #101) "The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed," (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #28). “Therefore, we cannot make more clear the seriousness of the overriding issue of abortion – while not the ‘only issue’ – it is the defining moral issue, not only today, but of the last 35 years. Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 48 million innocent lives have been lost. Each year in our nation more than one million lives are lost through legalized abortion,” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ).Principle:Abortion is the overriding issue, the defining moral issue, of our day because it is from the right to life that all the other rights - the right to food, shelter, health care, religious liberty, etc. - flow and are made meaningful. 6) “As Catholics we are faced with a number of issues that are of concern and should be addressed, such as immigration reform, healthcare, the economy and its solvency, care and concern for the poor, and the war on terror. As Catholics we must be concerned about these issues and work to see that just solutions are brought about. There are many possible solutions to these issues and there can be reasonable debate among Catholics on how to best approach and solve them. These are matters of 'prudential judgment.' But let us be clear: issues of prudential judgment are not morally equivalent to issues involving intrinsic evils. No matter how right a given candidate is on any of these issues, it does not outweigh a candidate's unacceptable position in favor of an intrinsic evil such as abortion or the protection of ‘abortion rights,’” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ). “Jesus tells us very clearly that if we don’t help the poor, we’re going to go to Hell...But, Jesus didn’t say the government has to take care of them, or that we have to pay taxes to take care of them. Those are prudential judgments...You can’t say that somebody is not Christian because they want to limit taxation. To say that it’s somehow intrinsically evil like abortion doesn’t make any sense at all,” (National Catholic Reporter, Interview with Archbishop Chaput, September 14, 2012).Principle:Not to have concern for, and not to care for, the poor, and the provision of basic human needs - food, shelter, healthcare, and so on - is intrinsically evil. However, the best way to address issues pertaining to the care and concern for the poor, and the provision of basic human needs, is a matter that can and should be discussed and debated. Disagreements as to the best way to address the concerns of the poor - more/less government; more/less taxes; etc. - are matters of prudential judgment. Two people can disagree on matters of prudential judgment and both still be in line with Church teaching.Principle:A candidate’s position with respect to matters that pertain to prudential judgments about immigration reform, healthcare, the economy, and care and concern for the poor, do not hold the same moral equivalence as a candidate’s positions on intrinsic evils such as abortion and same-sex “marriage.” Two people cannot disagree on matters of intrinsic evil and both still be in line with Church teaching. Principle: If a candidate gets it "right" in your eyes on matters of prudential judgment vs. their opponent; but is wrong on matters of intrinsic evil vs. their opponent; then the matters of prudential judgment cannot "make up" for being wrong on matters of intrinsic evil. So, those are a few principles that Catholics need to take into consideration when stepping into the voting booth. I will close with a couple of questions for those who would support someone who is a staunch supporter of abortion and abortion “rights,” not because you agree with their position on abortion, but because you agree with one or more of their other positions regarding government, taxation, welfare, education, the economy, and so on, and you think their positions on these issues outweigh their position on abortion. If you are one such person, please consider these questions carefully: Let’s say that the candidate you are voting for, instead of being a staunch supporter of abortion, and a supporter of the laws that allow for the killing of more than one million unborn babies each year, let’s say that instead of supporting abortion, that candidate was a staunch supporter of laws that allowed for the lynching of one million black men a year. Could you still vote for that candidate? Would their position on healthcare or education or immigration outweigh their position on lynching? Or, let’s say, instead of supporting abortion, that candidate was a staunch supporter of laws that allowed for the gassing of one million Jews a year. Could you still vote for that candidate? Would their position on healthcare or education or immigration outweigh their position on gassing Jews? Let’s be honest...you answered a strong, resounding, “NO!!!” to each of those questions, didn’t you? You could not and would not vote for a candidate who supported the lynching of even one black man, much less one million black men, no matter how “right” he or she was on the other issues. You could not and would not vote for a candidate who supported the gassing of even one Jew, much less one million Jews, no matter how right he or she was on the other issues. How, then, can one vote for a candidate who supports abortion “rights” and who supports laws that allow for the killing of over one million unborn children a year?! The only way one can do that is if they do not believe the unborn child is a human being deserving of full protection under the law. The only way one can do that is by devaluing the life of the unborn child. It is not my job here to tell anyone who they should vote for, but it is my job to let folks know what they need to consider when voting. Now, there are some who will say that the questions I posed above are a bit harsh. Well, I agree. But, before anyone emails me or calls me, please look at a picture of an aborted baby (you can find such pictures by doing a quick search on the internet) and consider if anything I’ve written is harsher than what happened to that baby.

Closing Comments

Please pray for our country, and particularly for these upcoming elections - that we can get the leaders we need at the local, state, and national levels, as opposed to the leaders we deserve. Our culture has become a sewer - abortion, contraception, same-sex "marriage," men able to use women's bathrooms, transexualism, euthanasia and now, I just read a story about the conception of the first "3 parent" embryo. A baby with 3 parents. We are trying to play God, and God doesn't ever take too kindly to that. There are some demons that can only be expelled through prayer and fasting...

Donations

The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations, or send a check to: Bible Christian Society, PO Box 424, Pleasant Grove, AL 35127. Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!

Hillary Clinton told bankers behind closed doors that she favoured "open trade and open borders" and said Wall Street executives were best-positioned to help reform the U.S. financial sector, according to transcripts of her private, paid speeches leaked Friday.The leaks were the result of another email hacking intended to influence the presidential election.

Excerpts of the speeches given in the years before her 2016 presidential campaign included some blunt and unguarded remarks to her private audiences, which collectively had paid her at least $26.1 million in speaking fees. Clinton had refused to release transcripts of the speeches, despite repeated calls to do so by her primary opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders.

The excerpts were included in emails exchanged among her political staff, including Campaign Chairman John Podesta, whose email account was hacked. The WikiLeaks organisation posted what it said were thousands of Podesta's emails. It wasn't immediately clear who had hacked Podesta's emails, though the breach appeared to cover years of messages, some sent as recently as last month.Among the emails was a compilation of excerpts from Clinton's paid speeches in 2013 and 2014. It appeared campaign staff had read all Clinton's speeches and identified passages that could be potentially problematic for the candidate if they were to become public.One excerpt put Clinton squarely in the free-trade camp, a position she has retreated on significantly during the 2016 election. In a talk to a Brazilian bank in 2013, she said her "dream" is "a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders" and asked her audience to think of what doubling American trade with Latin America "would mean for everybody in this room."Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, has made opposition to trade deals a cornerstone of his campaign. Podesta posted a series of tweets Friday night, calling the disclosures a Russian hack and raising questions about whether some of the documents could have been altered."I'm not happy about being hacked by the Russians in their quest to throw the election to Donald Trump," Podesta wrote. "Don't have time to figure out which docs are real and which are faked."Podesta's comments came just hours after U.S. officials publicly accused the Russian government of directing cyberattacks on political organisations and American citizens in an attempt to interfere with U.S. elections.The joint statement from the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Homeland Security Department cited disclosures of "alleged hacked emails" on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks as being "consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts."The statement didn't refer by name to the affected political institutions, but federal authorities are investigating cyberattacks on the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement, "It's not hard to see why she fought so hard to keep her transcripts of speeches to Wall Street banks paying her millions of dollars secret."The emails released Friday included exchanges between Podesta and other Clinton insiders, including campaign manager Robby Mook. Most were routine, including drafts of Clinton speeches, suggested talking points for campaign surrogates and suggested tweets to be sent out from Clinton's account.

The excerpts include quotes from an October 2013 speech at an event sponsored by Goldman Sachs, in which Clinton conceded that presidential candidates need the financial backing of Wall Street to mount a competitive national campaign. "Running for office in our country takes a lot of money, and candidates have to go out and raise it," Clinton said. "New York is probably the leading site for contributions for fundraising for candidates on both sides of the aisle, and it's also our economic centre. And there are a lot of people here who should ask some tough questions before handing over campaign contributions to people who were really playing chicken with our whole economy."In the same speech, Clinton was also deferential to the New York finance industry, exhorting wealthy donors to use their political clout for patriotic rather than personal benefit. She also spoke of the need to include Wall Street perspectives in financial reform."The people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry," Clinton said.In an April 2013 speech to the National Multifamily Housing Council, Clinton said politicians must balance "both a public and a private position" while making deals. Clinton gave an example from the movie "Lincoln," and the deal-making that went into passage of the 13th Amendment, a process she compared to sausage-making."It is unsavoury, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be," Clinton said. "But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position."Clinton's speeches often touched on technology and privacy. In an April 2014 speech to JPMorgan, she denounced National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden for going abroad, saying, "if he really cared about raising some of these issues and stayed right here in the United States, there's a lot of whistleblower protections."But she told her audience that her time in the public eye left her sympathetic to privacy concerns.

"As somebody who has had my privacy scrutinised and violated for decades, I'm all for privacy, believe me," she said.Speaking on international affairs, Clinton's comments were largely in line with her positions as secretary of state, if sometimes more blunt."The Saudis have exported more extreme ideology than any other place on Earth over the course of the last 30 years," she told the Jewish United Fund at a 2013 dinner.The speech transcripts were produced under an agreement Clinton routinely imposed on any organisation that hired her to speak. The contracts, such as ones crafted by the Harry Walker Agency, required the organisations to hire, at their own expense, a stenographer who would provide the transcripts to Clinton and not keep copies for themselves.In some cases, the contracts themselves were obtained by news organisations under public records laws because Clinton was being paid to speak by public universities or colleges.Exhibit B: A sociopathic liar, .fraud, criminal, and sexual pervert who wants to rule over you.

Following is an unedited transcript of the tape in which Donald J. Trump repeatedly made vulgar comments about women. Mr. Trump was filmed talking to the television personality Billy Bush of “Access Hollywood” on the set of “Days of Our Lives,” where Mr. Trump was making a cameo appearance. They are later joined by the actress Arianne Zucker. The transcription is by Penn Bullock of The New York Times.

Donald J. Trump: You know and ...

Unknown: She used to be great. She’s still very beautiful.

Trump: I moved on her, actually. You know, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. I’ll admit it.

Unknown: Whoa.

Trump: I did try and fuck her. She was married.

Unknown: That’s huge news.

Trump: No, no, Nancy. No, this was [unintelligible] — and I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping.

She wanted to get some furniture. I said, “I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.” I took her out furniture —

I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.

Billy Bush: Sheesh, your girl’s hot as shit. In the purple.

Trump: Whoa! Whoa!

Bush: Yes! The Donald has scored. Whoa, my man!

[Crosstalk]

Trump: Look at you, you are a pussy.

[Crosstalk]

Trump: All right, you and I will walk out.

[Silence]

Trump: Maybe it’s a different one.

Bush: It better not be the publicist. No, it’s, it’s her, it’s —

Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

Bush: Whatever you want.

Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.

Bush: Uh, yeah, those legs, all I can see is the legs.

Trump: Oh, it looks good.

Bush: Come on shorty.

Trump: Ooh, nice legs, huh?

Bush: Oof, get out of the way, honey. Oh, that’s good legs. Go ahead.

Trump: It’s always good if you don’t fall out of the bus. Like Ford, Gerald Ford, remember?

Bush: Down below, pull the handle.

Trump: Hello, how are you? Hi!

Arianne Zucker: Hi, Mr. Trump. How are you? Pleasure to meet you.

Trump: Nice seeing you. Terrific, terrific. You know Billy Bush?

Bush: Hello, nice to see you. How you doing, Arianne?

Zucker: Doing very well, thank you. Are you ready to be a soap star?

Bush: How about a little hug for the Donald? He just got off the bus.

Zucker: Would you like a little hug, darling?

Trump: O.K., absolutely. Melania said this was O.K.

Bush: How about a little hug for the Bushy? I just got off the bus.

Zucker: Bushy, Bushy.

Bush: Here we go. Excellent. Well, you’ve got a nice co-star here.

Zucker: Yes, absolutely.

Trump: Good. After you.

[Break in video]

Trump: Come on, Billy, don’t be shy.

Bush: Soon as a beautiful woman shows up, he just, he takes off. This always happens.

Trump: Get over here, Billy.

Zucker: I’m sorry, come here.

Bush: Let the little guy in here, come on.

Zucker: Yeah, let the little guy in. How you feel now? Better? I should actually be in the middle.

Bush: It’s hard to walk next to a guy like this.

Zucker: Here, wait, hold on.

Bush: Yeah, you get in the middle, there we go.

Trump: Good, that’s better.

Zucker

: This is much better.

Donald J. Trump: You know and ...

Unknown: She used to be great. She’s still very beautiful.

Trump: I moved on her, actually. You know, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. I’ll admit it.

Unknown: Whoa.

Trump: I did try and fuck her. She was married.

Unknown: That’s huge news.

Trump: No, no, Nancy. No, this was [unintelligible] — and I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping.

She wanted to get some furniture. I said, “I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.” I took her out furniture —

I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.

Billy Bush: Sheesh, your girl’s hot as shit. In the purple.

Trump: Whoa! Whoa!

Bush: Yes! The Donald has scored. Whoa, my man!

[Crosstalk]

Trump: Look at you, you are a pussy.

[Crosstalk]

Trump: All right, you and I will walk out.

[Silence]

Trump: Maybe it’s a different one.

Bush: It better not be the publicist. No, it’s, it’s her, it’s —

Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

Bush: Whatever you want.

Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.

Bush: Uh, yeah, those legs, all I can see is the legs.

Trump: Oh, it looks good.

Bush: Come on shorty.

Trump: Ooh, nice legs, huh?

Bush: Oof, get out of the way, honey. Oh, that’s good legs. Go ahead.

Trump: It’s always good if you don’t fall out of the bus. Like Ford, Gerald Ford, remember?

Bush: Down below, pull the handle.

Trump: Hello, how are you? Hi!

Arianne Zucker: Hi, Mr. Trump. How are you? Pleasure to meet you.

Trump: Nice seeing you. Terrific, terrific. You know Billy Bush?

Bush: Hello, nice to see you. How you doing, Arianne?

Zucker: Doing very well, thank you. Are you ready to be a soap star?

Trump: We’re ready, let’s go. Make me a soap star.

Bush: How about a little hug for the Donald? He just got off the bus.

Zucker: Would you like a little hug, darling?

Trump: O.K., absolutely. Melania said this was O.K.

Bush: How about a little hug for the Bushy? I just got off the bus.

Zucker: Bushy, Bushy.

Bush: Here we go. Excellent. Well, you’ve got a nice co-star here.

Zucker: Yes, absolutely.

Trump: Good. After you.

[Break in video]

Trump: Come on, Billy, don’t be shy.

Bush: Soon as a beautiful woman shows up, he just, he takes off. This always happens.

Trump: Get over here, Billy.

Zucker: I’m sorry, come here.

Bush: Let the little guy in here, come on.

Zucker: Yeah, let the little guy in. How you feel now? Better? I should actually be in the middle.

Bush: It’s hard to walk next to a guy like this.

Zucker: Here, wait, hold on.

Bush: Yeah, you get in the middle, there we go.

Trump: Good, that’s better.

Zucker: This is much better. This is —

Trump: That’s better.

Zucker: [Sighs]

Bush: Now, if you had to choose honestly between one of us. Me or the Donald?

About Me

First of all, the word is SEX, not GENDER. If you are ever tempted to use the word GENDER, don't. The word is SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! For example: "My sex is male." is correct.
"My gender is male." means nothing. Look it up.
What kind of sick neo-Puritan nonsense is this? Idiot left-fascists, get your blood-soaked paws off the English language. Hence I am choosing "male" under protest.